ca.news.yahoo.com/sexting-common-linked-...youth-123824395.html

Sexting common, linked to sex among high-risk youth

hedda wrote:
ca.news.yahoo.com/sexting-common-linked-...youth-123824395.html

Sexting common, linked to sex among high-risk youth

I am surprised it is legal to send explicit stuff by phone actually, seen as its so easy to get a wrong number.

Same as sending love letters around the classroom just much more discrete.

Mere consentual/unlawful SeX, is always unstoppable.

And it's the 'New Rock & Roll' for today's kids, all SeXting Generation-SeX.

Mocking, Victorian so called 'SeX Laws' while telling helpless bent-Cops/Media: " My Mind, My Body, My Choice - Mind Yer Own! "

" Curiously, the (UK) age of criminal responsibility is ten. From that age onwards, the law says that a person who commits a crime, such as murder or robbery, can be assumed to know what they were doing and can therefore be held responsible for their behaviour. But it is not until the age of 16 that the law acknowledges young people's ability to give sexual consent. The implication is that a decision to have sex is more complex and grave than a decision to kill or rob. The ten-year-old killers of James Bulger were declared old enough to be responsible for their actions and be convicted of murder. But if they'd had sex with each other and said they had consented, the courts would have ruled that they were too young to understand what is involved in a sexual relationship. This case sums up the legal muddle over the sexual rights of youth. Parliament seeks to safeguard against abuse by setting the age of consent at 16. But by denying the under-16s the right to consent to sex, it reinforces the idea that they have no right to make their own sexual choices. "

petertatchell.net/sex_education/sex_rights.htm
petertatchell.net/sex_education/best_protection.htm

Fair Justice wrote:
Mere consentual/unlawful SeX, is always unstoppable.

And it's the 'New Rock & Roll' for today's kids, all SeXting Generation-SeX.

Mocking, Victorian so called 'SeX Laws' while telling helpless bent-Cops/Media: " My Mind, My Body, My Choice - Mind Yer Own! "

" Curiously, the (UK) age of criminal responsibility is ten. From that age onwards, the law says that a person who commits a crime, such as murder or robbery, can be assumed to know what they were doing and can therefore be held responsible for their behaviour. But it is not until the age of 16 that the law acknowledges young people's ability to give sexual consent. The implication is that a decision to have sex is more complex and grave than a decision to kill or rob. The ten-year-old killers of James Bulger were declared old enough to be responsible for their actions and be convicted of murder. But if they'd had sex with each other and said they had consented, the courts would have ruled that they were too young to understand what is involved in a sexual relationship. This case sums up the legal muddle over the sexual rights of youth. Parliament seeks to safeguard against abuse by setting the age of consent at 16. But by denying the under-16s the right to consent to sex, it reinforces the idea that they have no right to make their own sexual choices. "

petertatchell.net/sex_education/sex_rights.htm
petertatchell.net/sex_education/best_protection.htm

Tatchell is right but skating on thin ice.

Remember seeing Tatchell at Digbeth Civic Hall back in '82.He was no the most inspiring of speakers.Tariq Ali was on the bill,stole the show!
Last I heard of Tatchell he along with a few fading baldy ex pop stars were getting beaten up in Moscow.